Sustainable Science? Reducing the Carbon Impact of Scientific Mega-Meetings

  • Alexandra G. Ponette-González Department of Geography, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #305279, Denton, TX 76203, USA,
  • Jarrett E. Byrnes National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USA
Keywords: Carbon Footprint, Greening the Meeting, Scientific Conferences, Planning, Sustainability


Scientists across the globe recognize the importance of reducing carbon emissions to combat climate change.  At the same time, we have increased our carbon footprint through air travel to the growing number of scientific society “mega-meetings” that host thousands of attendees.  Although alternative solutions have been proposed to reduce the environmental impact of annual conferences, these have yet to be evaluated against the business-as-usual scenario.  Here, we use 9 years of annual meeting attendance data from the Ecological Society of America and the Association of American Geographers to assess the efficacy of two additional solutions: 1) alternate large national meetings that require significant air travel with smaller regional meetings that do not; and 2) incorporate geography into the meeting location selection process.  The carbon footprint of annual mega-meetings ranged 3-fold, from 1196-4062 metric tons of CO2.  Results indicate that an alternating schedule of national and regional meetings can reduce conference-related CO2 emissions up to 73%, while improved spatial planning may result in further reductions.  We discuss the benefits and tradeoffs of proposals to green scientific meetings, with a view to spark further debate on how to increase the sustainability of scientific conferences.


Arslan, B. K., E. S. Boyd, W. W. Dolci, K. E. Dodson, M. S. Boldt, and C. B. Pilcher. 2011. Workshops without Walls: Broadening Access to Science around the World. PLoS Biology 9:1-5.

Bonnett, A. 2006. The Need for Sustainable Con-ferences. Area 38:229-230.

Burke, I. C. 2010. Travel Trade-Offs for Scientists. Science 330:1476.

Hall, E. 2007. Alternative Futures for Academic Conferences: A Response to Bonnett. Area 39:125-129.

Huang, S. T., M. N. Kamel Boulos and R. P. Dellavalle. 2008. Scientific discourse 2.0. Will Your Next Poster Session be in Second Life ®? EMBO Reports 9:496-499.

IEA (International Energy Agency) Statistics. 2010. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion - Highlights 2010 Edition. International Energy Agency, Paris, France

Jarchow, M. E., J. W. Rice, R. M. Ritson, and S. K. Hargreaves. 2011. Awareness and convenience are important in increasing conference sustainability. Sustainability Science 6:253-254.

Kempton, W., J. S. Boster and J. A. Hartley. 1995. Environmental Values in American Culture. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Lester, B. 2007. Greening the Meeting. Science 318:36-38.

McNutt, M. 2008. Scientific Meetings: Worth Attending. Science 319:281.

Mills, E. 2009. Sustainable Scientists. Environmental Science & Technology 43:979-985.

Philippe, H. 2008. Less is More: Decreasing the Number of Scientific Conferences to Promote Economic Degrowth. Trends in Genetics 24:265-267. Environment 360

Rosenthal, E. 2010. Toward Sustainable Travel: Breaking the Flying Addiction. Available at: Accessed on September 10, 2011.

Sills, J. 2011. Travel Trade-Offs for Scientists: Readers’ Poll Results. Science 331:145.

SCB (Society for Conservation Biology). The Wild Rose Conservation Site: SCB’s New Carbon Offset Project for 2010-2013. Available at: Accessed on September 10, 2011.

Struck, D. Buying Carbon Offsets May Ease Eco-Guilt but not Global Warming. Available at: Accessed on September 10, 2011.

Young, S. 2009. Rethinking Scientific Meetings: An Imperative in an Era of Climate Change. Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience 34:341–34.

How to Cite
Ponette-González, A. G., & Byrnes, J. E. (2011). Sustainable Science? Reducing the Carbon Impact of Scientific Mega-Meetings. Ethnobiology Letters, 2, 65-71.